在溫布萊大敗已經是羞辱，更大的羞辱在比賽後，匈牙利的教練Gustav Sebes竟然多謝一個英國人──占美賀根（Jimmy Hogan）：「我們打的足球是賀根所教的。他日記述匈牙利的足球歷史時，他的名字應用金書寫。」（We played football as Jimmy Hogan taught us. When our football history is told, his name should be written in gold letters）

反躬自省

賀根是愛爾蘭裔英國人，生於1882年。他反對當時英國球隊打的橫衝直撞、高Q大腳的足球。他重視技術多過體力、整體多過個人、主張多打地波少打高空波、傳球走位多過三腳內攻門。正如一位球評家說的：「全面足球是賀根構思出來的，米高斯只是完善它」（Total football was the brain child of Jimmy Hogan, while Rinus Michels perfected it）。

Benny Tai sets out the seven main components of the Occupy Central movement, which, he hopes, can help create a fair and just election system for Hong Kong and thus rebuild trust

There are seven components of the “Occupy Central with Love and Peace” movement. They form an integral whole. To some, this is far too complex. Indeed, these concepts are not simple. However, we are now facing a complex political reform process in Hong Kong. Therefore, a sophisticated plan is needed.

First, the ultimate goal of Occupy Central is to push for a means of electing the chief executive that can satisfy international standards on universal and equal suffrage under Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that is applicable to Hong Kong through Article 39 of the Basic Law.
We face a complex political reform process. Therefore, a sophisticated plan is needed

The standards include at least three reasonable requirements: that every eligible voter has an equal number of votes; an equal weight for each vote; and no unreasonable restrictions on the right to stand for election. A restriction that could be used to screen out a candidate purely on the grounds of political opinion would surely not be considered reasonable.

The second component is non-violent action. One form this takes in Occupy Central is civil disobedience. In a small but powerful book on non-violent actions, From Dictatorship to Democracy, Professor Gene Sharp suggested 198 methods of non-violent action, under three distinct categories: protest and persuasion, non-co-operation, and intervention.

Creating a social disturbance to a degree that it makes governance difficult is not the main objective of non-violent action. Rather, such action aims to generate a desire among people to impose limits on the government’s power and cultivate an understanding that people have the ability to withhold their consent to be governed by the existing illegitimate authority.

Third, there is civil disobedience. The objective here is to arouse people’s concern for the injustice of existing laws or systems. Martin Luther King Jnr provided a summary of civil disobedience in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail”. This is the model of civil disobedience. According to King, acts of civil disobedience are also illegal acts, but people who have committed them will voluntarily surrender themselves to the authorities and are willing to bear legal responsibility. They may join such acts to win people’s sympathy and support. However, one must also carefully calculate the cost that might be incurred before taking part.

Occupy Central will follow these principles to organise our acts of civil disobedience. Such acts would only be carried out after Occupy Central’s proposals on the means of electing the chief executive were rejected by Beijing.

Next, citizen authorisation after deliberation. These “deliberation days” are the process for citizens to indicate their stance directly on public issues. The actual proposal for the means of electing the chief executive needs authorisation from the general public. In addition, a decision should only be made after a detailed and well-designed deliberative process in which people receive adequate and balanced information on the options, and on the pros and cons of proposals from people holding different viewpoints.

Those who agree with the convictions of Occupy Central, no matter whether they are prepared to join in any future acts of civil disobedience, will be invited to join the deliberation days. Participants will deliberate in a group, with neutral moderators and facilitators. Through an electronic voting system, the general public can indicate whether they endorse the proposal recommended by Occupy Central.

Fifth, social awakening. As King said, the objective of civil disobedience is to awaken people to see the injustice in the laws and systems. If people are alerted to how systemic injustice has hurt the dignity of individuals as well as the general interests of the community, they may use different methods – including other non-violent action – to bring about change. The goal of Occupy Central is the same. Hong Kong people would be awakened to see that universal and equal suffrage is a basic right for all. It is also an important method to rectify the legitimacy crisis of the Hong Kong government so that it can enjoy the legitimate authority to introduce reforms to resolve deep-seated conflicts that include the widening wealth gap.

Sixth is the political game. Occupy Central is a political game in Hong Kong in which supporters of true democracy plan and act strategically. A game is interactive. A player’s action must generate sufficient impact or influence, actual or perceived, on other players before they will be pressured to react. But all games involve risk. One cannot accurately predict all possible actions of other players and one cannot foresee whether one’s action will generate any reaction, or indeed what that reaction might be. Action can only be planned on the basis of information at hand. Decisions in a game are made rationally.

It is hoped that sufficient pressure can be put on the players who are against true democracy in Hong Kong, including the pro-establishment camp and the central government. If they can rationally reconsider their positions, it is possible that they will agree to have true democracy in Hong Kong. Occupy Central does not want to see a winner-takes-all result, but to create an opportunity for all players to come together to negotiate the details on how to implement true democracy in Hong Kong.

Finally, public dispute resolution. To resolve a public dispute, the key is to construct a procedure that can allow all parties involved to enter on an equal footing into a deliberative process. This process aims to help the parties adopt an open-minded attitude in understanding the concerns of others. On the condition that no party’s basic interests or values are infringed upon, they would be encouraged to reach a consensus and a win-win solution. Occupy Central will first have to deal with the differences on strategies to achieve universal suffrage within the pan-democratic camp. Hopefully, the camp can be consolidated into a more powerful and united force for democracy in Hong Kong.

Many people consider that Occupy Central is too radical a move to strive for true democracy, that there is no chance Beijing would accept a demand presented in this manner. However, if civil disobedience were not planned, the chances of achieving true democracy would be even slimmer.

Our actions are rational and peaceful. There is no attempt to challenge the sovereignty of the central government. We only want a fair and just election system for Hong Kong. Trust between Hong Kong people, the Hong Kong government and the central government can be rebuilt.

Benny Tai Yiu-ting, an associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, is the initiator of the Occupy Central Movement. This is an edited version of a speech he made at a luncheon organised by the Hong Kong Democratic Foundation on Monday

早早訓練他們自發性地獨立處理功課考試，當中也曾付出過代價──孩子在真正明白自己的能力及效率以及課程的真正要求之前，亂打亂撞的，肯定有機會遭遇滑鐵盧。可是正如天下間一切的禍事一樣，愈早遇上，翻身的機會愈高。我深深相信並常常鼓勵孩子的一句話是：「If it does not kill you, it makes you stronger.」孩子在Trial and error的過程中悟出學習的方法，是受用一生的事。

Andy Xie says asset inflation is being pumped up in the name of stimulating a stagnating global economy and helping the unemployed. But the reality is that such policies benefit neither

Five years after Lehman Brothers went bust, the global economy remains in stagnation. But you wouldn’t notice it if you are in the stock market. The US market is hitting all-time highs. The Japanese market has risen by half in five months. And while Europe’s economies are in recession, the shares of its top companies are highly elevated too. Shouldn’t stock prices reflect or predict the economy? Don’t count on it. The dichotomy shows how ill economic management has become.

In the name of stimulating the economy and creating jobs, today’s macro policies mainly cook up asset inflation to benefit a few, which may trickle down to the unemployed through the so-called wealth effect. Unfortunately, few crumbs reach the bottom.
Pumping cheap money in through asset markets only benefits those people who can borrow

The US Federal Reserve claims that its policy has helped create two million jobs; that’s less than US$100 billion in income per annum. But one-third of the stock market valuation, over US$6 trillion, can be attributed to the Fed’s policy. The decline in interest rates may account for one-fifth of the corporate earnings. Instead of investing more to create jobs, the big companies have borrowed to buy back shares or pay dividends. Unless you are a shareholder, the Fed’s policy doesn’t benefit you much. The unemployed are, of course, least likely to be shareholders.

The Bank of Japan is learning from the Fed about boosting asset prices by printing money to buy whatever it wants to lift. Japan doesn’t even have an unemployment problem. It believes that asset inflation will lead to sustainable economic growth, ignoring that Japan’s main economic problems are its declining population (falling by around one million per year) and that its leading companies such as Sony and Sharp are no longer relevant to today’s world. Euphoria over the bubbly asset prices is giving instant credibility to the Bank of Japan’s policy. If asset inflation were the solution, Japan wouldn’t have suffered for the past two decades. Didn’t people blame the prolonged stagnation on its asset bubble then? A decade ago, even the then Fed chairman, Alan Greenspan, blushed to explain the logic of asset inflation leading to economic growth. Bubble-making was then considered wrong. Now what the Fed is doing is widely praised. And the Bank of Japan has earned much kudos for copying it. Didn’t the bursting of the Greenspan bubble lead the world into this mess? When people are in pain for too long, they begin to believe in quick remedies. Current Fed chief Ben Bernanke is being praised for doing what Greenspan was cursed for. It will take another bubble burst for people to see through this.

Capitalism is about market forces or the profit motive allocating capital, not governments or inherited power. In the real world, though, it never works exactly that way. It is often more profitable to subvert market forces rather then embrace them. Robber baron capitalism is one manifestation. John D. Rockefeller acquired his wealth mainly through creating and enforcing a monopoly. No one could be so rich in a perfectly competitive environment. Since antitrust laws were introduced in the developed economies, no one has become as rich as the robber barons a century ago.

Most emerging economies remain emerging because they practise crony capitalism. If undocumented wealth is included, the richest people in the world are really from emerging economies, not people like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett. Bad systems, not a lack of money, is the reason poor economies remain poor. If an emerging economy wants to develop, it must replace crony capitalism with the rule of law. But that, of course, won’t please the rich people there.

Monetary activism is a new factor that has subverted the market economy in the past quarter of a century. In the name of stimulating an economy in a downturn, to benefit the unemployed, a government cuts interest rates and pumps in liquidity, which inflates asset bubbles. Greenspan did it to the stock market in the 1990s and then the property market. When a bubble bursts, more stimulus is called for, again in the name of helping the unemployed.

The current debate on stimulus versus austerity misses the point. Neither really helps the people most in need. If central banks really want to help people through monetary policy, they should print money and distribute it equally. If monetary policy works, giving it to the people should be most effective.

Pumping cheap money in through asset markets only benefits those people who can borrow. Through such bubble cycles, wealth becomes more concentrated among those who gamble with debt. Maybe it is intended. Central banks seem too close to the people who gamble with borrowed money. Just check out the glitzy financial talk shops. Greenspan-style monetary policy is really a new form of crony capitalism. It rewards a special class of people who borrow cheap money to gamble. When it goes wrong, the bubble bursts. Another round of cheaper money follows. Hence, those with access can always double up. With so much wealth concentrated in finance, the central banks can even justify making policy for them. Otherwise, they may bring down the house.

Bubbles are really a redistribution game. As money becomes cheaper and cheaper, inflation is inevitable. Even though reported consumer price indices are not yet high, check out education, health care and housing. The biggest expenditure items are not in the CPI basket and are rapidly inflating. The little people are hurt most from such inflation. Their suffering then subsidises those who borrow cheap money to bet on asset bubbles.

Crony capitalism is associated with backwardness, and for a good reason. When profits go to those with power, not productivity, economic progress is slow. As the developed economies embrace bubble economics and crony monetary policy, they may join the ranks of emerging economies. The world may become more equal after all, with the top falling down.